Taylor is as much about morale as he is about what he brings to the team

[TheLongshot]

One thing I was thinking about as far as this move goes. One thing you really don't want to start off with a new head coach trying to get off to a good start is to have one of your major players go down for the season. I remember when Gibbs came on board and Jansen went down early in training camp. That kinda set the tone for the rest of training camp.

Having injuries like the two we had on Sunday can be pretty devistating for a team. While some have suggested, "Why make this move? The Skins aren't going to be doing anything this season.", you really don't want that to be the attitude of the team going into the season, that your season is already over before it starts. If that happens, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's something Zorn doesn't need, especially with a tough early schedule.

Getting Taylor pretty much quiets any worries by the other players as to who is going to fill the void left by Daniels. It pretty much dissapates any clouds of impending doom.

Jason

[DesertWrestler]

Good point. Bringing in Taylor seems to have the defense excited to play and the offense excited to know they don't have to score on every drive. Can't wait to see the pressure that can be created now.

[paige3girl]

great thread. I think you make a great point. I think signing a player of Taylors stature sends a strong message that Daniels position was one of value and we are going to do our best to make sure the Defense continues perform at the highest level possible.

[Cooley4President]

Totally agree. Was it the ideal trade? Probably not considering his age and maybe having 2 years left to play. But it brings an impact guy in at a time when the front office is saying "you know what? We think we can win now". And not in the old bring-in-free-agents-and-hope-to-win-now way, this is the we-are-happy-with-our-roster-and-think-we-have-a-chance way.

[redman]

I agree and had been thinking the same thing. It was a boost for a team that was starting the season down.

[IbleedBnG83]

It definately gives a players and extra incentive to play harder when they feel they get a great guy that can help the team after loosing two players.

[Pete]

While it's a moral booster that was needed, I really wonder what the O line is thinking. Heyer, a completely unseasoned rookie had a great showing against Taylor last year. I hope the move to the left side will help his productivity, because he's likely not gonna be matched up against rookies often.

[Jumbo]

Excellent point, Jason The resulting excitement, curiousity, and interest within the team will really moderate, and even replace to an extent, the dwelling on the negative that otherwise would be typical for many. While the deal was of fair and equal value IMO to all parties, I consider this aspect a real plus in the positive "intangibles" category affecting the whole team and most of the fans.

Hope you heal well and compleletly, Mr. Daniels, and that we see you in B & G again asap. :cheers:

[Tarpon75]

Nice to read a well thought out and positive post.I agree with your assessment totally.While there are pros and cons to every trade I see this one as big plus for the Skins.If Taylor stays healthy and produces near the level he has in the past the defense should be greatly improved.Everything I have seen of Taylor to this point shows that he is a team player and a great addition to the Redskins.

[Dirk Diggler]

I can buy that improving "morale" was probably a small factor. But what's worrisome is that while losing Daniels hurts/sucks, there are about 10 other players on this team more indispensible. Also, should the price of morale cost a 2nd rounder? What's that say about the fabric of the team and their ability to cope with loss if we lose one starter and have to starting sending draft picks away to improve morale? The odds strongly suggest that Daniels won't be the last player to go down for an extended period of time. What then?

[redman]

Also, should the price of morale cost a 2nd rounder?

You've got a false premise working here, namely that morale was the only reason for getting him. Not so.

[thesubmittedone]

Great point... trading for Taylor certainly has generated plenty of excitement and was a great relief most of all.

[DGreenistheBest]

I have to be honest, I'd probably be flipping out about the losses right now if it wasn't for the Taylor signing. Instead, I'm just cautiously optimistic that we can get a year or two of good play out of a solid vet while players rehab.

[TheLongshot]

While it's a moral booster that was needed, I really wonder what the O line is thinking. Heyer, a completely unseasoned rookie had a great showing against Taylor last year. I hope the move to the left side will help his productivity, because he's likely not gonna be matched up against rookies often.

Heyer probably had a lot of help in that game. I doubt he was left on an island with Taylor. I'll have to rewatch the game footage.


You've got a false premise working here, namely that morale was the only reason for getting him. Not so.

I guess he didn't read the thread title. :silly:

Jason

[Dirk Diggler]

You've got a false premise working here, namely that morale was the only reason for getting him. Not so.

As I said in my first sentence, it was probably a small factor. And if that's the case, what's that say?

[redman]

As I said in my first sentence, it was probably a small factor. And if that's the case, what's that say?

That they're human?

[Morneblade]

I can buy that improving "morale" was probably a small factor. But what's worrisome is that while losing Daniels hurts/sucks, there are about 10 other players on this team more indispensible. Also, should the price of morale cost a 2nd rounder? What's that say about the fabric of the team and their ability to cope with loss if we lose one starter and have to starting sending draft picks away to improve morale? The odds strongly suggest that Daniels won't be the last player to go down for an extended period of time. What then?

Real bad premise. First off DE was by far the thinest position we have. At every other position, we have guys we KNOW can start, and play well. Smoot is our 3rd Corner and can start. HB Blades can start at all 3 LB positions and play well. We actually have depth at Saftey since Landry can play either and have Doughty and Stu that have both been starters. We have a good rotation at DT, Golsten has started. The O line is as deep as it has been in years. Rinehart will be a beast, Heyer looked great for a UDFA last year and should be better this year and Brown looks like a real stud. Collins can obvious play QB for us. Betts can obviously play RB for us. We have Thrash, Kelly and Thomas at WR. Yoder and Davis and TE. FB is thin.

Then we have Defensive End. Zero depth at one of the most important positions on the field. Daneils might not be the caliber of some of the other guys we have (and I agree with that) but that fact that he was starting tells you how very thin we were there. It would be like having Vernon Fox as your starting FS. Not because of injury, but because he was the best FS you have. After that, nothing. James shouldnt even try to play till late in the season, and I'd be happy if he didnt at all. Bringing Taylor gives James a chance to get 100% healthy (ACL usually take 2 years, and this is his 2nd ACL tear) so he wont have to rush back on the field. Taylor also represents a big upgrade over Daneils. He makes the entier defense better by making the D-Line beter. If Taylor only plays out ins contract (2 years) James will be 27, in his physical prime, and 100% healthy. Since we only payed a 7th rounder for him, you can look at giving a 2nd rounder for to get a 1st rounder healthy. It's not a horrible deal. in that light.

[RedskinPryde]

Title was a little confusing but overall good move for the skins bringing him in, especially during this time of need

[Dirk Diggler]

That they're human?

Ok, I'm with ya. I don't want to minimize how difficult and shocking it was to lose a leader that quickly.

But losing a solid though unspectacular player in Daniels should not have the state of Redskin Park at Defcon 5 (or is it Defcon 1, I haven't seen War Games in a few years :) ). This speaks to a much larger issue: that we shouldn't be in position to HAVE TO be shipping away high draft choices to stop the bleeding.

We're going to have far bigger obstacles to overcome than a Daniels ACL tear... be it an injury to a better player, an 0-2 start, Jason Campbell completing 54% of his passes, etc. I worry immensely when management acts like Kennedy just go shot. Not a good sign.

[Drakkhim]

It's going to be fun watching Taylor smack the snot out of anyone that comes near him.

[LoudMouth12thMan]

While it's a moral booster that was needed, I really wonder what the O line is thinking. Heyer, a completely unseasoned rookie had a great showing against Taylor last year. I hope the move to the left side will help his productivity, because he's likely not gonna be matched up against rookies often.

Good point to the OP, but Pete, it was the first game. He did have a sack and 5 tackles against us. I wouldn't call that a great showing for us. A couple of tackles and no sacks would have been a "great showing." I'm not really worried as much b/c I believe that he has some guys that can collapse the pocket on this D line. The Dolphins weren't necessarily that great up front. I mean, Vonnie Holiday and Keith Traylor...not exactly that productive. Carter and Griff should be a better line to work with. That added pass rushers opposite Carter should make Griff and Montgomery better, at least you'd think so.
HTTR

[TheLongshot]

Ok, I'm with ya. I don't want to minimize how difficult and shocking it was to lose a leader that quickly.

But losing a solid though unspectacular player in Daniels should not have the state of Redskin Park at Defcon 5 (or is it Defcon 1, I haven't seen War Games in a few years :) ). This speaks to a much larger issue: that we shouldn't be in position to HAVE TO be shipping away high draft choices to stop the bleeding.

We're going to have far bigger obstacles to overcome than a Daniels ACL tear... be it an injury to a better player, an 0-2 start, Jason Campbell completing 54% of his passes, etc. I worry immensely when management acts like Kennedy just go shot. Not a good sign.

Maybe it is because you underrate Daniels' role on this defense. Maybe that should tell you something that there is more to this. One thing I can tell you is that there are things Daniels can do that Taylor can't replace. Different players, different strengths.

Jason

[Morneblade]

Ok, I'm with ya. I don't want to minimize how difficult and shocking it was to lose a leader that quickly.

But losing a solid though unspectacular player in Daniels should not have the state of Redskin Park at Defcon 5 (or is it Defcon 1, I haven't seen War Games in a few years :) ). This speaks to a much larger issue: that we shouldn't be in position to HAVE TO be shipping away high draft choices to stop the bleeding.

I agree and alot of people have been saying we needed to address the DL and DE for YEARS. Daniels was the weakest link on the team, and he went down it created a void that was so big that we had to do something drastic. NO doubt we should have done siomething before. James was the plan, but we for some reason thought a 35 year old DE that has a history of getting hurt would make through a season. It didnt happen.


We're going to have far bigger obstacles to overcome than a Daniels ACL tear... be it an injury to a better player, an 0-2 start, Jason Campbell completing 54% of his passes, etc. I worry immensely when management acts like Kennedy just go shot. Not a good sign.

We're actually in much better shape at every position that we were at DE. Injury wise, it couldnt have come at a worse position. The reaction was what we needed to do. The part that was worrisome was being in that position to begin with.

[fansince62]

One thing I was thinking about as far as this move goes. One thing you really don't want to start off with a new head coach trying to get off to a good start is to have one of your major players go down for the season. I remember when Gibbs came on board and Jansen went down early in training camp. That kinda set the tone for the rest of training camp.

Having injuries like the two we had on Sunday can be pretty devistating for a team. While some have suggested, "Why make this move? The Skins aren't going to be doing anything this season.", you really don't want that to be the attitude of the team going into the season, that your season is already over before it starts. If that happens, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. That's something Zorn doesn't need, especially with a tough early schedule.

Getting Taylor pretty much quiets any worries by the other players as to who is going to fill the void left by Daniels. It pretty much dissapates any clouds of impending doom.

Jason


or raises more quesrions about how the roster has been built and a supremely injury prone defense.

[Digger]

My concern regarding the all the coverage of Taylor is that I've seen several suggestions that he had an off season last year and his drop in production (as if 11 sacks is not a good thing) is due to his age. As bad as the Dolphins were last year, I'd be interested to see the run vs. pass ratio of their opponents. Even in their only win there was no one playing catch up to them all year. I'm guessing their opponents ran the ball and ran down the clock more than against other teams.

Taking that into account, morale or no morale factor, Taylor upgrades our arguably thinnest position quite a bit. Sure 8.1 mill is a lot of cash, but cash in the bank doesn't win games.

Just my 2-cents.
Cheers!

[Pete]

Heyer probably had a lot of help in that game. I doubt he was left on an island with Taylor. I'll have to rewatch the game footage

I'd have to watch it again too, but if memory serves me, he didn't get a lot of help, and they had Taylor spacifically going after Heyer with the reasoning of the untested rookie was easy game for Taylor. Even though Taylor mostly plays from the right side, it's not abnormal for him to move from side to side depending on the team and packages he was faced with.

I've watched him a lot throughout his career, and Jason Taylor is a class act on and off the field. In our situation, I like the move. It won't be the first time a change of location puts some fuel back in the tank of an older player.

[BoRnAndRaiSedSkinsFan]

The training camp blog stated that the DLine looked extremely pumped and excited during practice. JT def brings a swagger to our DLine. I am also excited because EJ is a young talented player with a JT type body. He should be able to learn a lot from him and could be really good for us in the future.

[Morneblade]

The training camp blog stated that the DLine looked extremely pumped and excited during practice. JT def brings a swagger to our DLine. I am also excited because EJ is a young talented player with a JT type body. He should be able to learn a lot from him and could be really good for us in the future.

EJ?

[ciresolstice]

This was discussed on the radio(redskins radio) yesterday when I was coming home from work. (it being a morale booster to offset any bad feelings of losing PD for the year early like that) I think of Jon Jansen and Pierson...kinda set a bad tone those times.

Of course we also get a legitimate pass rusher, a 6 time pro bowler, and 06 defensive player of the year.

[Saeth29]

While it's a moral booster that was needed, I really wonder what the O line is thinking. Heyer, a completely unseasoned rookie had a great showing against Taylor last year. I hope the move to the left side will help his productivity, because he's likely not gonna be matched up against rookies often.

Taylor mainly matched up against Samuels last year. Heyer matched up against the Dolphins Left DE, for the most part. It would have been smart to keep Taylor against Heyer, but I'm pretty sure they didn't except for maybe a series or two.

[SkinsHokieFan]

Very good point, and the points about Jansen and Pierson make sense as well

Those 2 injuries put a real forboding sense on the 2004 and 2006 seasons, before they even began. Jansen in the first preseason game in 2004 and Pierson on the 1st kickoff. It seemed in both cases the team never recovered from the psycological effect.

The injury to Philip Daniels certainly had that potential, and I really didn't think of the psycological effect of bringing in Taylor, but it definitley makes sense

[skins2victory]

It was a great move hands down!! JT will play hard for us this year and im sure the reasult will be great.

Go skins

[Cooley4President]

EJ?

I'm guessing Erasmus James

[Morneblade]

I'm guessing Erasmus James

Yeah, it just hit me, LOL!

[fansince62]

Real bad premise. First off DE was by far the thinest position we have. At every other position, we have guys we KNOW can start, and play well. Smoot is our 3rd Corner and can start. HB Blades can start at all 3 LB positions and play well. We actually have depth at Saftey since Landry can play either and have Doughty and Stu that have both been starters. We have a good rotation at DT, Golsten has started. The O line is as deep as it has been in years. Rinehart will be a beast, Heyer looked great for a UDFA last year and should be better this year and Brown looks like a real stud. Collins can obvious play QB for us. Betts can obviously play RB for us. We have Thrash, Kelly and Thomas at WR. Yoder and Davis and TE. FB is thin.

Then we have Defensive End. Zero depth at one of the most important positions on the field. Daneils might not be the caliber of some of the other guys we have (and I agree with that) but that fact that he was starting tells you how very thin we were there. It would be like having Vernon Fox as your starting FS. Not because of injury, but because he was the best FS you have. After that, nothing. James shouldnt even try to play till late in the season, and I'd be happy if he didnt at all. Bringing Taylor gives James a chance to get 100% healthy (ACL usually take 2 years, and this is his 2nd ACL tear) so he wont have to rush back on the field. Taylor also represents a big upgrade over Daneils. He makes the entier defense better by making the D-Line beter. If Taylor only plays out ins contract (2 years) James will be 27, in his physical prime, and 100% healthy. Since we only payed a 7th rounder for him, you can look at giving a 2nd rounder for to get a 1st rounder healthy. It's not a horrible deal. in that light.

morne...there's a flaw in your logic: EJ has never played like a first rounder.

[fansince62]

You've got a false premise working here, namely that morale was the only reason for getting him. Not so.

good move in the short run. bad move...once again...in the long run.

[Morneblade]

morne...there's a flaw in your logic: EJ has never played like a first rounder.

True, but there are some reasons for that. First, he was asked to get bigger than he was comfortable at. Second, he admittedly felt alot of pressure to play well and I think that he pressed. Third, and most importantly to us, just when he was starting to play well (DE's usually take a year ) he tore his MCL and ACL, then came back to fast and tore the ACL again.

What is different in Washington is that there isnt much pressure to be a impact player day one. He's going to play with his old college coach that had him playing at a very high level and he'll be playing on grass. I think these things are in his favor, but in all honesty we dont really know what we're getting. But in all honesty, we're in the same boat with a 2nd round pick in the draft as well.

No one knows what Davis, Thomas or Kelly are going to do, They might all bust out and be out of the league in 3 years, right?

Right. Or they all might be great players. Or somewhere in between.

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

LS.

I know what your saying ,but its a lot less about morale than it is about the upgrade possibilities taylor presents. The morale boost is a side effect but not the cause. So it's not as much about....imo.

[fansince62]

True, but there are some reasons for that. First, he was asked to get bigger than he was comfortable at. Second, he admittedly felt alot of pressure to play well and I think that he pressed. Third, and most importantly to us, just when he was starting to play well (DE's usually take a year ) he tore his MCL and ACL, then came back to fast and tore the ACL again.

What is different in Washington is that there isnt much pressure to be a impact player day one. He's going to play with his old college coach that had him playing at a very high level and he'll be playing on grass. I think these things are in his favor, but in all honesty we dont really know what we're getting. But in all honesty, we're in the same boat with a 2nd round pick in the draft as well.

No one knows what Davis, Thomas or Kelly are going to do, They might all bust out and be out of the league in 3 years, right?

Right. Or they all might be great players. Or somewhere in between.

btw...I think folks are missing a potential problem downstream...if all 3 second rounders pan out...there is no way we can keep all of them through the round of contract extensions: too much money tied up in WRs and TEs. something will have to give.....and more than just Moss.

[Morneblade]

btw...I think folks are missing a potential problem downstream...if all 3 second rounders pan out...there is no way we can keep all of them through the round of contract extensions: too much money tied up in WRs and TEs. something will have to give.....and more than just Moss.

Possibly. And is there any way we keep both Davis AND Cooley? Davis will be gone at some point, hopefully we can trade him and get something back. The WR's (if they both work out) I'm less worried about. Moss and ARE will be both over 30 soon, and we might be moving them both. If both Thomas and Kelly really excel we might have some other decisions to make, but the odds of that happening are pretty low. Even then, most teams would pay to have 2 good WR's. But certianly not 2 highly paid TE's.

[TheLongshot]

good move in the short run. bad move...once again...in the long run.

Maybe. But if he helps us to a Superbowl, then it is more than worth it.


btw...I think folks are missing a potential problem downstream...if all 3 second rounders pan out...there is no way we can keep all of them through the round of contract extensions: too much money tied up in WRs and TEs. something will have to give.....and more than just Moss.

Personally, I think it is a nice problem to have. A lot can happen in the next 4 years. Players could get hurt or get dissatisfied. Others might play better. Course, this is assuming that all three become great players. The odds are kinda against that.

But, if it doesn't make sense to keep them all, there is always the option to trade players. We don't have to resign them to benefit from them further. New England has almost made it an artform.

Jason